Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
on this side? >> first of all i'd like to thank chairman mica and ranking members brown and cummings for holding this hearing today which focuses on it's noted that amtrak has a record of 30.2 million passengers. traveling on amtrak and full year 2011. we would have seen head lines like amtrak has record of low ridership. instead amtrak's ridership is booming this year with 11 consecutive monthly rider ship records. in each month of this fiscal year, amtrak has posted the highest total ever for that particular month with the final month of september also expected to be a new record. >> a 25% cut in funding and even more alarming not having a vision for high-speed rail network. these actions are detrimental to the transportation opportunities for all americans. the alternative to build more roads by more cars and consume more oil should not be our only solution. in fact, according to d.o.t., in comparison, in 1958 through 2012, the united states has invested $1.4 trillion in our nation's highways, $538 billion in aviation, $266 billion in transit, and yet amtrak, which was created in
to have an electric car or natural gas-powered car and you see what happens. senator brown alexander has been a real leader in this and he even has an electric car. he is going the distance here, walking the walk. that's the kind of thing government can do. government can do a lot on the regulatory side to slow things down if you forget to have effective cost-benefit analysis, but it can do a lot on the project side to really find something that works and the community becomes the laboratory for change and that others can then model. you do not have to do it everywhere and if you can show in water to a location that there really work. that is the driving force behind the idea of that lamar has been a significant spokesperson for. >> do like that car? >> i do like it. i have driven my leaf. for a lit -- for a year-and-a- half. i live in this building in a plug in the wall when i go home at night. that's all i have to do. deployment communities are a good idea. sometimes the government can have a demonstration project that makes a difference. they did a hydraulic factory and we have had fr
five wars are started. that's where halliburton and brown and root is. that's your largest military base in the world. that's where all your nafta and all your illegal labor. host: i don't understand the connection to what we are talking about. caller: well, you're talking about the fiscal cliff. that could be sucked out. $1.5 trillion out of our economy a year for oil and war. that's texas and virginia. texas and virginia is your war. now you're talking about taxes. if voted -- go to delaware. that's where all your tax shelters are and your credit card companies. a trillion dollars in credit card debt. now you go to the state of new york -- host: you're saying overall states are the problem? >> there's three states in this country that are responsible for 95%. you have the east coast jews. host: ok. wild and wonderful from twitter this morning, better the fiscal cliff than the one that could result from a compromise for compromise's sake. on the democrats line, hi. caller: thank you for taking my call. host: go ahead. caller: no problem. i just wanted to say that, you know, -- awfu
knowledge brown's rule of law. how do we pack its ongoing efforts -- around rule of law. how do we pack its ongoing efforts that will yield real benefits -- package ongoing efforts that will yield real benefits? each speaker will take 15 minutes for a presentation, after which we will have a conversation and use a few moments to open it up to the audience. it is a great honor and privilege to turn the floor over to the professors. we will just go in that order is that will be ok. bill, we will start with you. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, ambassador huntsman, for the introduction and for your superb service to our nation in beijing. i would like to say john thornton, cheng li and jerome cohen for this series. for bringing he weifang to the broader international audience, you are enriching the knowledge of china. thank you very much. it is fitting that he weifang should be the first person from the world of law in this series. he is somebody of incredible courage, which, incisiveness, and preach against -- prescience. i cherished member -- memories from harvard where we had a
charlie brown my friends, this is a good bill. the president continues to move the ball, the democrats continue to move the ball, every time republicans want to do something positive on immigration, on the economy, they keep moving the ball away from us. let's stop being charlie brown, my friends, this is a good bill, it would strengthen our economy, it will create jobs and it is exactly what the president asked for a year ago. let's call his bluff and send him a bill to create jobs and opportunities here in america. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. ms. lofgren: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote
from bull's best said. polls-simpson said brown the base, lower the rates. we now have the president's proposing raising the rates and opposing a base-broadening measure. republicans want to keep the rate same and run the base, but that is different. bowles-simpson had it right. i look at the logic of the white house with regard to the idea of capping a itemized deductions. i would like to take a look at it from a cost-benefit point of view. we're looking at tax expenditures, and we should benefits inst of doing it. they're against it for two reasons, the first one was effected some taxpayers making less than 2 hen $50,000, which is true. this would be a $50,000 cap, said the people we're talking about are people who are using way above average levels of itemized deductions at that level. when -- to the analysis using the tabulated data, i get about 1.2 million taxpayers with incomes under $250,000 over the $50,000 cap. according to the white house, they are proposing to get around that by a method that costs $200 billion over the 10 years. if you apportion that to protect these 1.2
was first up, but it looks like it might be texas. excuse me. florida. ms. brown: i'm from florida, and i'm from the home of claude pep per, and he was a -- pepper, and he was mr. social security. and he was here during the time of ronald reagan and he plead sure that social security, which was enacted under the democrats, and i will never forget newt gingrich said he wanted it to wither on the vine. that's been their philosophy. now, i feel that medicaid, medicare and social security is the difference between us and many of the thirled-world countries. in fact, it has been the bedrock of american politics as far as helping to raise the standards. and you know, many of my colleagues often talk about the bible. well, the bible says -- i never heard them say let's help the rich. the bible always talks about the poor and what we need to do to help raise the standards. that's what we're supposed to be doing in the people's house. during the campaign, they constantly confused the american people, talking about the $715 billion that was in both proposals that was savings that we put back into t
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)